Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2014 June 16

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< June 15 << May | June | Jul >> June 17 >
Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.


June 16[edit]

00:23:48, 16 June 2014 review of submission by Drowning Worms[edit]


Hello there, I'm afraid I just had my first submission rejected. I would like to address the issues and resubmit but I have included as many references as I could think of and don't think there is anything in there that's not verifiable. I believe the person I have written about is noteworthy enough to deserve inclusion, but I'm not sure what to change. Can you help me by making some suggested edits? Thanks in advance and apologies. Best wishes, James Drowning Worms (talk) 00:23, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Drowning Worms: I'm going to leave a comment on the draft for you. Fiddle Faddle 19:11, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Timtrent: Thanks Tim - I really appreciate you taking the time - most useful. Drowning Worms 04:50, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

01:58:22, 16 June 2014 review of submission by Garryanas[edit]

Thanks in advance for helping me. My article was rejected on two claims. First, the authors notability. A quick look into wiki shows me that several authors that are less notable have been included. Here is one example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathaniel_G._Moore

Next, the citations were questioned. However, they are all from publisher websites, so I am not sure how verifiable they can be. When I look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deborah_Willis_%28Canadian_author%29 it seems that she has the same or similar sources.

Please help me to clarfiy how or if I can improve this article. Otherwise, is it possible to have another editor look at it for a second opinion.

Thanks again.Garryanas (talk) 01:58, 16 June 2014 (UTC) Garryanas (talk) 01:58, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Publishers publish books, and booksellers sell books, so they are not independent sources such as are required to prove notability on Wikipedia.
The existence of other inadequately referenced articles is, I'm afraid, not a reason to create more.
Citing substantial independent reviews of Little's work, for example in major newspapers, might be the best way of establishing her notability. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 08:33, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

02:26:19, 16 June 2014 review of submission by Granitedesk[edit]


I am pleased that my new article on author Daniel James Brown has been accepted. I find it if I enter Daniel James Brown in the Wikipedia search box; however, I don't get a result when I Google "Daniel James Brown Wikipedia". Next steps? Thanks in advance for your help. Granitedesk (talk) 02:26, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Granitedesk (talk) 02:26, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It has been five days since the article was accepted, so give Google a few more days to catch up. I can't see it where I would expect in Google either yet. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 08:27, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

04:08:47, 16 June 2014 review of submission by Maniac1992[edit]

I need help with my article but can't find reliable sources

Maniac1992 (talk) 04:08, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

05:34:03, 16 June 2014 review of submission by Mcgama88[edit]


I humbly request review toward the submission via sandbox, as I view the index case in trisomy, or downs syndrome, to be rather of interest to a wide population as live birth incidence has been suggested at 1/1000. Further, the suggested data allows mature female care providers a mechanism of reduction in live birth numbers.

I submit that details of this submission deserve your care and addative resource. To allow the interested observer a time scale, an early woodcut suggested case observation in the 17th century. The subsequent increase in population will allow some actual case numbers in world specifics to emerge. Further, the larger coherent viewpoint to reader is that there should be some hope toward theraputic. While not discussed specific to the topic, I suspect a certain regard for research view would be premised in that an advance in model presents a view towards a difficult chromosomal assay.

Mcgama88 (talk) 05:34, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcgama88: no Declined Your submission looks like original research, not an encyclopedic article. Your submission has no sources at all. Much of your submission, like your post above, is incoherent and I can only assume that you're not a native English-speaker. In any case, your submission is too technical and lacks enough context for the general reader. Chris Troutman (talk) 05:47, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

07:04:54, 16 June 2014 review of submission by Nmwalsh[edit]


Nmwalsh (talk) 07:04, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm new to Wikipedia. Somebody has commented that my company page is not sufficiently notable. How do you make a company page notable. I have shown it's origins, shown it's standing in the Chamber of Commerce, it could not be said to be advertising since the activities of the company is implicit in its name "Admiral Pest Control". What else should the page have so that it is acceptable. Nmwalsh (talk) 07:04, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is established by references showing significant coverage of the organisation in independent reliable sources. WP:42 summarises this. If such coverage does not exist, then nothing you can do will make the organisation notable. Incidentally, the Chamber of Commerce would not be considered an independent source for this purpose.
Looking at your draft, there is certainly some coverage of the organisation in local and specialist publications, even if some of it is not really about the organisation as such, so I will leave it up to someone else to consider the re-review that you have requested on the draft. If you can add any more press coverage, that might help.
Looking at the topic as a whole, the organisation does seem to be a relatively unremarkable - albeit successful - small family firm in operation for less than a century, so would not normally fit within Wikipedia's requirements for an encyclopedia article. Despite another editor's comment, I am not sure that trying to create an article about Jeff Jones would fare any better. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 08:23, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

12:10:51, 16 June 2014 review of submission by Karinsoika[edit]

Hi, I am struggeling to get the above draft reviewed. What I do not quite understand:

Question 1: Is there a different policy of accepting submissions, depending on the country? I had ZERO problems to get http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Schotter accepted. What I want is just an English version of it, with identical content, for international readers. I am trying since April... Are US-submission guidelines different from German guidelines? Isn*t there a GENERAL Wikipedia line?

Question 2: Is there another way of offering an English version of an German Wikipedia article?

Question 3: TimTremt declined the article as in his eyes ist is a "List of Movies" - is creating https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_movies_by_Robert_Schotter&action=edit&redlink=1 an option for me? And linking that article then to the German Robert-Schotter-Article?

Question 4: What is the Robert Schotter page supposed to contain then? Private information? Went to school... travelled to... married... divorced...hobbies?? Is that really of public interest? Isnt an award won not enough to extablish notability?

Thanks and regards, Karin

Karinsoika (talk) 12:10, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The German Wikipedia does have different standards and a slightly different culture to the English one. For example, article length is watched more closely on that Wikipedia compared to here, while we focus more stringently on content and referencing. The article over there was created in 2009, and may have just had a better chance of slipping through the quality control net.
As for what needs to be done here, simply put, the article should talk about what reliable sources such as books, magazines and newspapers have said about him, which will probably be his film career and the critics' responses to it. His personal life is generally irrelevant; while it would be useful to know his date of birth, we err on the side of caution when dealing with articles about living people. I had a look for appropriate sources via a quick google search, but didn't obviously find anything, though there is another Robert Schotter who is a US Marine who has some coverage. This is a shame, because if I found one source, I could point at it as an example. You might find some success doing a search through German newspapers if any are online. Unfortunately, without those sources to hand, we can't reliably determine why Schotter is important, which unfortunately means he can't have an article at this time.
There is a process by which articles in other languages can be translated into English - see Help:Translation - but the guidelines for notability and reliable sources will still need to be adhered to.Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:20, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ritchie333, thank you for your very helpful reply. I'll give my article another try soon... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karinsoika (talk • contribs) 13:38, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

12:17:28, 16 June 2014 review of submission by Shantu.khanduri[edit]


Shantu.khanduri (talk) 12:17, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The first line of your draft read "Understanding Competitor Price Monitoring and Why You Need It for Your Business". I have marked it for speedy deletion as blatant advertising. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:24, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

17:55:13, 16 June 2014 review of submission by Warrenchase[edit]


Recently corrected bare link references on an article that was accepted but set under "Start Class" level. Is there another vehicle for review after changes like this have been made? As the article is added to/improved and additional references are linked to it will it improve from "Start Class" upward?

Warrenchase (talk) 17:55, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The lower levels of article quality can be reviewed by anyone on a relevant project, though in practice these can get out of sync and are often ignored. The major exceptions are good articles and featured articles which require a formal review, especially for FAs which undergo a rigorous review process. If you think André Harvey (sculptor) is now at C-class, simply be bold and change the assessment tags on the talk page. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:01, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your advice Ritchie333 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warrenchase (talk • contribs) 19:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

18:02:55, 16 June 2014 review of submission by Dadonnino[edit]


I would like help on how to get this article submitted. I and my colleagues have been attempting this often for a few months now, and with only basic knowledge of Wikipedia it has been proving much more difficult than originally thought.

Please help! Thank you Dadonnino (talk) 18:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Dadonnino: There are no shortcuts, I fear. The draft article, if reviewed today, would be declined because it has no inline citations, and is about a living person. Take it slowly. Read WP:REFB, WP:CITE, and add references. The issue you will face is that there are tough criteria for references. They must be independent of the person, must be significant coverage,and must be in WP:RS.
By the way, your mention of colleagues will cause some questions to be asked. We have a "One person, one account" policy. You are very welcome top collaborate with your friends and colleagues as long as either you alone operate the account, or they create accounts and join in as distinct editors.
One thing that will help you is WP:Mentoring. Do consider it. There are, as I have said, no shortcuts, but you will find mentoring a very useful learning tool. Fiddle Faddle 18:54, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Draft:Grant Sorensen[edit]

Accepted move to Grant Sorensen as a Australian volleyball article Molly (talk), 18:19 16 June 2014 (UTC) Accepted move to Grant Sorensen as a Wikipedia article, Molly Ann (talk) 18:21 16 June 2014 (UTC) Accepted move as a article on Wikipedia Molly (talk), 18:37 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Please stop using the accepted template. The draft will be reviewed soon enough and this page is to ask for help. This load of stuff just put me off reviewing it. We're human, you see. Fiddle Faddle 18:47, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

19:19:23, 16 June 2014 review of submission by Ruba.atallah[edit]


Hi I would like to know what kind of authorization i need to obtain from the owner of the photo to be used in the info box? in this case Mr. Salameh is the owner of the picture i used and later was deleted. Thank you for your kind help in advance Ruba.atallah (talk) 19:19, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Wikipedia:DONATEIMAGE covers what they would need to do. There are a few options there; any one of those options would be enough. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 15:22, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

20:03:48, 16 June 2014 request for review by Amaya3562[edit]


My name is Amaya and I am an intern at Intellect Press in Wilmington NC. I have articles about the magazine I want to upload on Wikipedia, and I've edited 10 articles in order to be able to do so. However, I don't know where to go from here still. Where can I upload the article? Thank you for the help, Amaya — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amaya3562 (talk • contribs) 20:03, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Amaya3562: The lesson here is that you should have waited for our reply. You created Intellect Press after posting this question and that article is going to be deleted. Please read our guidance on writing your first article as well as our guideline on reliable sources and an explanation of general notability before you make further edits to Wikipedia. Chris Troutman (talk) 06:46, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

21:34:06, 16 June 2014 review of submission by Sandra-nyc[edit]


Sandra-nyc (talk) 21:34, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I created a second article as a draft however I can't find it anymore. My sandbox allows me to see the first article I created only. Do you know where I can find my second article?

Thanks in advance!

Best regards,

Sandra Delabaere

@Sandra-nyc: Are you referring to Draft:Sanjay Laforest? Darylgolden(talk) 23:38, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2014_June_16&oldid=1104235887"